From owner-cvs-all  Mon Nov 29 23: 9: 0 1999
Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org
Received: from apollo.backplane.com (apollo.backplane.com [216.240.41.2])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id E560715471; Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:08:57 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from dillon@apollo.backplane.com)
Received: (from dillon@localhost)
	by apollo.backplane.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) id XAA21340;
	Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:08:56 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from dillon)
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:08:56 -0800 (PST)
From: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>
Message-Id: <199911300708.XAA21340@apollo.backplane.com>
To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@zippy.cdrom.com>
Cc: obrien@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG,
	cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/i386/conf files.i386 src/sys/kern kern_fork.c src/sys/libkern arc4random.c src/sys/sys libkern.h 
References:  <89029.943945335@zippy.cdrom.com>
Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk

:> I actually prefer them.  I put what I want in my kernel config file and
:
:You're in the vast minority here. :)
:
:- Jordan

    Given the choice between kernel binary bloat and options bloat, I'll take
    the options bloat.  Options can always be rearranged and cleaned up (or
    removed).   Kernel bloat is harder to deal with. 

    Alternatively we could try our hand at 'negative options', i.e. options 
    that disable things rather then options that enable things.  I dislike
    the idea of gratuitously denying a new option simply on the basis of 
    option-bloat fears.

					-Matt
					Matthew Dillon 
					<dillon@backplane.com>


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message